A factional leader of the All Democratic Alliance (ADA), Umar Ardo, has asked a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja to stay the execution of its orders directing the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to generate and subsequently release Access Code for the registration of the All Democratic Alliance (ADA) as a political party, to the Chief Akin Rickett-led leadership of the association.
It be recalled that Justice Peter Lifu, who issued the order in a judgement he delivered on Monday, also gave the commission 72 hours within which the access code must be released to the Protem Secretary of the association.
Justice Lifu had, in the judgement, faulted the electoral body for releasing the access code to Umar Ardo, who was not a recognized Protem Secretary of the political association and consequently declared the action of INEC as illegal, wrongful, null and void.
ALSO READ: Osun: Police arrest 27 suspects over political thuggery, others
The court had further ordered INEC to open its portal for a period of one week to enable the plaintiff to upload necessary documents, including the membership register, into INEC’s custody as required by law.
But, in less than 48 hours after the order was issued to INEC, Ardo had filed a motion for stay of the said order at the Federal High Court in Abuja.
He has, through his counsel, filed a Notice of Appeal before the Abuja division of the Court of Appeal, wherein, among others, he is asking the appellate court to set aside the orders issued against the electoral umpire.
The motion for stay dated and filed June 30, by his lawyer, Qousim Opakunle, was brought pursuant to Order 32 Rules 1, 2, 3, 4 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019, and under the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
It reads, “An order of this Honourable Court staying the execution of the judgment of this court in this suit delivered on June 29, 2026, pending appeal.
He predicated the motion for stay because he has filed a Notice of Appeal against the judgment delivered on June 29, 2026, which had granted the reliefs sought by the claimants/ respondents.
“That unless execution of the said judgement is stayed, the applicant will suffer substantial loss and irreparable damage, as the registration of All Democratic Alliance (ADA) as a political party pursuant to the said judgement would be an act incapable of being undone or reversed, even if the appeal succeeds.
“That the registration of a political party is a public act with far-reaching constitutional and electoral consequences, and once effected, cannot be undone without causing significant disruption to the electoral process and public confidence in the integrity of the electoral system.
“That the balance of convenience tilts in favour of granting the stay, as the public interest in maintaining the integrity of the electoral register outweighs any private interest of the Claimants/ Respondents in immediate registration”.
Meanwhile, in the Notice of Appeal filed June 30, Ardo in grounds one claimed that the trial court erred in law when it held that the suit filed by Chief Akin Rickett and Aminu Ahmed was not statute-barred under Section 76 of the Electoral Act 2022, notwithstanding that the suit was filed on January 16, 2026; more than one month after the cause of action arose, in clear violation of the 14-day limitation period prescribed by the said Section 76.
The appellant in grounds two also claimed that the trial court erred in law and misdirected itself on the facts when it held that the suit did not amount to an abuse of court process, despite the existence of a pending prior suit FHC/ ABJ/CS/2788/2025 between the same parties seeking identical relief of registration of the All Democratic Alliance (ADA) as a political party.
He also argued that the trial court erred in law and misdirected itself on the facts when it ordered INEC to issue a fresh access code to the 1st and 2nd respondents for the purpose of registering All Democratic Alliance, thereby occasioning a miscarriage of justice.
According to Ardo, INEC, upon receipt of the administrative fee from the Association through the Appellant, issued the code to the Appellant on behalf of the Association, and the application for registration was carried out online but was denied by INEC on the ground that the Association had changed its leadership.
He further claimed that the denial of the registration of the Appellant’s Association is a subject of appeal in CA/ABJ CV/742/2026.
“The order of the trial court to the 3rd Respondent is that a new code be issued to the 1st and 2nd respondents within 72 hours, and the portal must be open to them to make another application for registration of ADA in the names of the 1st and 2nd respondents, who are not members of the ADA.
“That the trial court, by so doing, had set aside the decision of the Association over their internal affairs, which the trial court lacks the jurisdiction to do.
“That this Honourable Court erred in law when he failed to evaluate the minutes of the Association which contains the decisions of the Association to change its leadership as they desired and held that the 3rd respondent has the discretion to determine if the Association has met the requirement of the law or not based on the change of leadership”, he said.
He is therefore asking the appellate court to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment of the trial court in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/93/2026.
It would be recalled that Rickett and Ahmed had, through their counsel, Stephen Atabo, dragged the electoral body to court over its refusal to issue them an access code to enable them to upload the information and documents needed for the registration of the ADA as a political party, in compliance with extant laws.
They also sought another declaration that INEC violated the extant laws when it issued the access code to the second defendant, Umar Ardo, who is neither the protem national chairman nor the secretary of the association, instead of the plaintiffs.
They further pleaded with the court to declare that the information uploaded into INEC’s portal by a wrongful person, or Umar Ardo on behalf of ADA, violated the extant laws, as it was at variance with the information in the plaintiffs’ letter of intent and should therefore be declared illegal, unlawful, null and void, and of no effect.
Besides, the plaintiffs asked for an order of the court against INEC, directing it to release the access code to them for the purpose of uploading their information and documents for the registration of their association as a political party.
They also asked for an order directing INEC to register their political association as a political party and to issue a certificate of registration to the plaintiffs.
Similarly, an order of the court directing INEC to extend the deadlines of May 10, 2026, and May 30, 2026, for the submission of their digital register of members and submission of candidates, respectively, to the electoral body.
After reviewing the submissions of counsel to parties involved in the legal battle, Justice Lifu agreed that Umar Ardo was neither the national pro tem chairman nor secretary of the political association and therefore nullified all the steps and actions taken on behalf of the ADA.